Codington County hears design and budget update for new jail; construction estimate $31 million

Commissioner Gable asked the Codington County Board of Commissioners on March 11 to receive an update from project architects on the county jail design and budget. John Strosberg and Andrew Itrow of the design team presented progress in the design‑development phase, cost estimates and the planned schedule.

The architects said the project is in design development, the stage when schematic plans are translated into construction details. "Design development is how is it going to work, and construction documents is how do we build it," John Strosberg said. He told the board the current construction estimate being designed to is $31,000,000, with total project costs projected at about $37,000,000 after professional fees, fixtures, furniture and equipment and contingency are included.

Why it matters: design‑development choices affect operating costs, staffing and long‑term maintenance. Strosberg said the team is reviewing tradeoffs such as mechanical systems, ceiling security levels and finish quality to keep ‘‘must haves’’ within budget while identifying ‘‘nice to have’’ items that could be deferred.

The design team described a two‑stage bidding approach. Early bid packages will include long‑lead items (site work, structural work and the building envelope) to avoid schedule slippage. Final construction documents and the remaining bid packages will establish the guaranteed maximum price. The team said their schedule anticipates breaking ground in early July unless bid timing or lead times shift.

Capacity and layout: the current plan shows 88 male beds, 20 female beds and 4 beds for juveniles, with room on the north side set aside for future expansion of 16 additional male beds. "There are 88 male, there's 20 female, and there's 4 juvenile. And then we also do ... room for future expansion of 16 more beds down the road," Andrew Itrow said. The architects explained the female housing mixes single cells and a 12‑person unit formed from three 4‑bed cells; the team said that mix reflects recent design choices intended to reduce square footage and equipment costs while addressing operational dynamics.

Security, staffing and supervision: the architects and county staff emphasized staffing as a primary driver of long‑term operating costs. The design includes two control points: a central control station that observes female housing, juvenile housing and intake, and a north staff post to manage the male housing. The facility uses indirect supervision in housing areas to reduce the number of staff required on the floor, while acknowledging direct supervision options would increase staffing needs.

Cost breakdown and schedule details provided to the board included: - Construction target: $31,000,000 (design team focus for current phase) - Professional fees (architect, soil testing, survey, construction quality testing): approximately $3,400,000 - Fixtures, furniture and equipment (FF&E) and contingency make total project estimate roughly $37,000,000 - Planned ground‑breaking: early July (subject to change after bidding and long‑lead item delivery)

The architects said the team is working with the sheriff’s office on choices that trade initial cost versus operating cost (for example, higher upfront mechanical costs to reduce future operating expenses) and on door types and other security hardware that can reduce staff needs on some shifts.

Public access and security: the presenters said they will not publish interior floor plans online for security reasons but will make drawings available for in‑person review by members of the public who request to see them. "We don't really wanna show you the skin out of the building inside of the building itself for security reasons," Itrow said during the presentation.

Next steps: the design team will produce a cost estimate at the end of design development, complete construction documents and issue the remaining bid packages that will set the guaranteed maximum price. County staff and the sheriff’s office will continue to prioritize must‑have elements and identify potential tradeoffs.

Commissioners did not take formal action on the jail project at the March 11 meeting; the presentation served as an informational update.